Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Should I Allow A 'Smart TV' To Connect To The Internet?
Slashdot reader GovCheese has a question:
I use Roku and also the client apps on my gaming consoles for Amazon and Netflix. But it seems less prudent to allow my television, a Samsung, to connect to the internet. My Phillips Blu-ray wants to connect also. But I'd rather not. Is it illogical to allow Roku and a console to connect to streaming services but prevent a "smart" television from doing so?
Slashdot reader gurps_npc argues there's a distinction between devices that need internet access and devices that want it, adding "Smart TVs overcharge in privacy invasion for the minimal advantages they offer."
Leave your own best answers in the comments. Should you let a smart TV connect to the internet?
Slashdot reader gurps_npc argues there's a distinction between devices that need internet access and devices that want it, adding "Smart TVs overcharge in privacy invasion for the minimal advantages they offer."
Leave your own best answers in the comments. Should you let a smart TV connect to the internet?
Pretty much the only reason I let my "smart" TV connect to the Internet is for firmware updates. Don't think I've had one in a while though now so assuming they've stopped being developed I may disconnect it soon.
The Blu-Ray player needs to connect to the internet for updates to be able to play the latest discs. The Smart TV does not, unless you are actually using its "smart" features.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Didn't Samsung get caught for their TVs always listening to everything around them, with no permission asked? LG was caught snooping on all files and filenames on the network, if my memory serves. Then there were a couple of others whose names I've already forgotten..Heck, pretty much every TV-manufacturer has gotten caught with their pants down by this point. A Roku is somewhat of a different beasts, because it needs Internet for streaming. I would hazard a guess that they track whatever you do on the Roku-box itself, but may not go to the same lengths as TV-manufacturers do, when it comes to overall spying in general.
Personally, I would rather give the TV a middle finger than any connectivity, whatsoever.
Next question.
Nope nope nope. Nope. Nope.
Just no.
this. you encourage product recalls by allowing firmware updates. if you need an update, then you have a service contract not a real product.
Mine has internet access but not on the same network. Cant snoop my files. Same for mobile phones. Use mac to keep on mobile wlan
insert your cock into holes between bathroom stalls in any Miami club? Stupid question.
If your smartphone (modem firmware plus tons of closed source software) and x86 computer (IntelME, NIC firmware, closed source software) are connected to the Internet on a regular basis using the same network provider then you've already forfeited your privacy and security.
So, the real question is how much additional data you'd like to share with third parties. I'm thinking your movies preferences hardly constitute something to worry about.
My LG is hardwired. I use its DLNA features but I also block it by MAC from sending any traffic out of the local RFC1918. This obviously isn't going to work if you use the TV's streaming features but for locally hosted content it's ideal.
As for firmware updates, Samsung's recent brick debacle where it took a technician physically opening the case to get them back pretty much answers that question. The general rule for stuff held in programmable ROM is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." I understand many will want KRACK fixes for WiFi as soon as they're available, yet I also wouldn't be holding my breath thinking this is a priority for vendors; they have your money, you're on your own. However, if there's a flaw in the monetisation of your viewing habits they'll be jamming those bytes down your digital throat before you can blink.
Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
You allow your smartphone to connect to the Internet, right?
I'm pretty sure your smartphone (that generally has 3 microphones and 2 cameras, and you carry it around) is a way, way bigger privacy concern.
Yet you wouldn't ask Slashdot, should I allow my smartphone to connect to the Internet.
Right? See my point?
Plex is my current go to, the smart TV roku etc do not need internet access (have to fake a bit of it to get some to use the network). If you want privacy you have to avoid cloud-based anything. I still put them on their own vlan.
No sir I dont like it.
Short answer is no! Samsung is one of the worst their Os is riddled with bugs and backdoors.
Longer answer is what is your use case scenario? is there some good app that you really need and is worth expanding your attack surface for?
Smart Tv's are aggressively spying on the user do you really want to let it phone home using your connection?
I believe the internet is all about privacy trade off i.e. give pokemon go your location so you can catch pokemons. Or give google your soul so you no longer have to think for yourself and to live permanently with your head in the cloud.
Your TV and Roku are both closed source. You have no idea what either one are doing, so you might as well let etiher one do whatever they want.
Does connecting your TV to the internet brings you something?
- Yes : connect it
- No : don't
It's that simple.
And the fact that you connect a device to the internet (because it is useful for you to do so) doesn't mean you have to connect everything. It is not all or nothing. From a security/privacy perspective you want to keep your attack surface as small as possible, but it doesn't mean you need to completely wall yourself in unless you have more to hide than normal people.
Anything connected to the INTERNET should be updated and kept secure. Many of these Smart TV's and other Internet devices lose support quickly which leaves anything on that network in your home vulnerable. Personally I will never buy a Smart TV because the software for the device will probably lose support long before the TV stops working. So your left with a not so Smart TV that still works, but you'll end up buying external devices anyway in he long run.
I just recently bought a pair of 55in Samsung Smart TVs
They each connected to the internet once for firmware updates, and were immediately disconnected afterwards. Unless there's a problem that requires me to update their firmware again, they won't ever be connected again.
All of the apps that the TV offers are already present on my Roku's and quite franky, the Roku's do it better
I told it, you choose.
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
What kind of retarded question is this? If you use any features that require the internet, connect it to the internet. I watch Amazon Video on my Smart TV, so it is online. If you don't need anything like that you might as well not connect it.
If you are worried about the top-secret national security level stuff you have on your local network, well, ask you security team, not slashdot... And in any case from a security/privacy perspective you should probably be even more worried about other devices (starting with your mobile phone).
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
Everyone here know WHY. Connect devices which need updates periodically and then disconnect them.
Do you know your device?
Do not let anything connect to the Internet if you don't know why it should.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
In my home I implement two different networks. Each with it's own gate way. Now this requires more than your average level of IT skills in the home.
One network is for what I will call class one devices. These are devices that I specifically add to the it. These will be things like computers, tablets, gaming and phones. The second network and the default network is for every other device. Now this requires me actually promote devices the class one network. Typically be mac address.
Thus all those pesky iot devices end up in the default network. The default network is blocked from the internet.
Note a device that runs something like pfsense will do the job. There are lots of alternative setups.
Now. I can also tailor each device in each network to have slightly different network privileges than the each networks default. Example would be a security camera uploading data to my private cloud storage. But I also block all DNS resolution of add servers and malware end points etc in my class one network.
This is not something a regular I know how to turn on my laptop kinda person can do. This requires a reasonable amount of automated scripting, network monitoring and pro-active tuning as situations change. However it can all be done rather cheaply with couple hundred dollar pfsense box installed between the internet modem->pfsense->router(wifi).
So yeah I block everything. I only enable access when required and even then I can make it temporary. The more IOT crap that ends up in the house the more this setup is saving my backside.
( Note: I don't use pfsense I implemented all the services I need from pfsense myself in VM's. But it's basically the same thing. )
I don't buy smart TVs. I refuse to pay so much extra for half assed online capability that will no doubt be abandoned in 2 years when they stop updating.
We actually got rid of our TVs. All of them. We are now a TV-free household. It just got to be too much of a pain to watch what we wanted to watch.
Our family life has gotten immeasurably better since now we do things together as a family instead of sitting around watching TV. Having made this transition, I am fully convinced that TV is the major culprit behind the destruction of the family and the decline of our society.
I use Slashdot for a very long time and still some questions on main page kills me.
What was the reason you purchased Smart TV in the first place?
Did you buy it to be "cool" or what?
Or you just wanted standard TV but you have seen this one is "smart" so it must be better?
I use Samsung Smart TV and I bought it mainly for two reasons:
- Netflix
- Youtube
I understand you don't use these services. Because they don't work without internet access. Because they are internet services.
So what do you do on your "smart" TV? Watch "smart" programs or what?
First decide which device will be your primary content streaming device. Then updating the TV's system software and some of its basic apps can be followed by unplugging your TV from internet and leaving all the input from your BR player. I did it this way for my Mom's set-up, so she is not confused with Netflix on TV vs Netflix on her disc player. Same thing to us, different thing to them old folks.
you should, you should accelerate the process of mass surveillance as quickly as possible so you brainless fucking drones can get the death you deserve all the quicker
I went through the hassle of setting up VLANs predominantly for a similar reason; all these smart devices which would like internet access, which really don't need it. So once VLANs were setup, I could very easily restrict which devices could get out to the internet, which devices could communicate with "privileged" devices on the network etc. Super pain in the ass though, requiring an MDNS reflector setup for that "ease-of-use" though, the Philips Hue hub seems to have a really hard time in that setup.
If you value your privacy or the sanctity of your home at all, never ever connect "Smart" TVs to the Internet, or even to the Wifi. It is basic security 101.
Get yourself a proper Linux box (i.e. one with a general distro: Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian, Gentoo, ArchLinux...) with a media player like Kodi and streaming services, and use that instead. MUCH safer, and it will respect your privacy.
The blue-ray also NEVER needs to connect to anything. It gets crypto key and blacklist updates from newer (pressed) blue-ray disks, it was *designed* for permanent offline operation. If it needs internet, it is a shit player that is doing something it *really* should not be doing, and it will *never* be in your best interest to connect it.
Given the general incompetence at firmware security, avoid wifi and bluetooth on these devices. The above mentioned Linux media box will get firmware updates / OS updates to deal with it, the TV and other such devices won't.
I.e. SmartTVs are working for their masters (the vendors), *NOT* you. It is NOT smart at all to use these devices, but since you can't buy a decent monitor for home use otherwise, at least keep them offline.
I use my "smart tv" as a computer screen and then I have a computer running Windows hooked up to it.
If your router offers a guest wi-fi account, would it be better to use that instead, since it does not have local access to your internal network?
I have a TV from 2011. It is a "smart" TV, and it is connected to the internet. When I subscribed to Netflix, I used it for that purpose. Although I've cancelled Netflix, I still use it to watch Vudu movies once in a while. It's still connected to the internet. So what? Where is the harm? What's the worst that can happen? Someone, somewhere, is going to be bored enough to hack into my TV? And then what? Brick it? Big deal. I will buy a newer TV that is better and a fraction of the price I paid for this one. Listen to my conversations? No Microphone on this TV, so good luck with that. Watch me? No camera on this TV, so good luck with that too. I'm sorry, but I'm just not paranoid enough to worry about someone hacking into my SmartTV. I've got much more likely shit to worry about.
Everyone here would know both Google and Apple have done this crap as well - and for the same reasons that do not benefit you - but by all means wag your finger at a smart TV.
Nobody wants to see your dick. Not Reese. Not Courtney. NO ONE.
Yeah, OK bud. Keep dreaming.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
No.
I only connect devices that need to be on the internet. When it comes to TVs, Blu-Ray players, etc, I temporarily connect them once in a while just to get the latest firmware updates and then I disconnect them.
Time and again various IoT crapware has proven that it is insecure. The reason for this is simple. Companies making TVs have experience making TVs. And even if the corporation behind it (like with, say, Sony) should have some experience with computers and securing them (ok, I admit, Sony is a bad example...), that doesn't mean that they talk with each other. Or that securing computers applies equally to securing IoT devices. If anything, IoT has more in common with cellphones, and even here you can easily see (with Samsun, no less) that experience in one area does not translate to the other.
Embedded devices and developing them has fundamentally different rules than developing "real" computers or cellphones. Unlike with computers and cellphones, you're not only responsible for the hardware, you're developing the software, and you either even have to develop your own OS or at the very least tailor a Linux distribution to your needs. If you're lucky, you have someone in your team (or you buy one) that can actually tailor Linux.
Your chances of this person also being a security expert is slim to zero.
What you're dealing here is a very newly developed piece of software, a veritable "v1.0" (which, as anyone in IT knows is more akin to a "v0.9beta"). And you pit that against people who have literally decades of experience hacking machines on the internet who know all the old tricks and the new 0days. This is a pitched battle if there has ever been one.
And all the old tricks that every security conscious developer of internet facing computer software knows by now work again. Because the people developing the IoT-Software, i.e. people developing embedded software, have no experience with security issues. They developed for closed systems, with a focus on small code and optimal use of resources rather than sanity checking and input testing.
If you throw someone into a job where he suddenly should react to a threat he cannot even assess because he doesn't even KNOW what the threat is, the result is the IoT crap we have today.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I use my TV pretty much just as a display for whatever devices I connect to it. Even for the firmware update, the TV does not need internet connectivity (just put the file on a USB stick). I have read too many horror stories about the TV phoning home what channels you watch, what video files you play etc. to use the internal apps of the TV and allow it network access. That, plus the internal apps usually suck.
They infringed the offline rights of the products in the default standard of the things.
Not all the people has access to Internet, by example, the rural ones's.
If you want only local WiFi, set your gateway and dns to invalid address. This will prevent internet access to your t.v.but allow your local network to access the t.v..
I installed a custom firmware on my TV (they all run Linux anyway) and this lets me do all sorts of stuff on my TV. If you already have a Linux box that does all that, and you just need a âoedumbâ TV then I probably wouldnâ(TM)t bother given it has no added value, then again, I wouldnâ(TM)t purchase smart TVs if Iâ(TM)m not going to use the functionality, itâ(TM)s a waste of money (~$100-300 in added cost)
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
I would say buy a dumb TV but it seems that all larger models are now smart. I bought a Vizio smart TV and returned it to the store. I actually read the agreement I had make before I could even turn the TV on. I found the terms and conditions to be unacceptable.
How long before it's ubiquitous to include a cellular modem that phones home all the juicy private information with no need for other connectivity? Sure, none of the smart parts would work for you without official connectivity, but that won't stop them from spying on everything anyway.
My LG TV, once connected to my wifi router, can't be told to disconnect from it - the only way I managed to break the connection is by changing the password.
A firmware update for my parents' Sony 3D TV (I know, "there's your problem right there") removed a section in the menuing system that previously let you stream a few 3D demos. Wouldn't have been so bad if they just stopped adding new 3D demos, but no - they removed it altogether. These days if they want to see any 3D at all, it's gotta come from purchased 3D blu-rays.
This is when I decided that TVs needed to go back to being dumb display devices and nothing more. Remove the "smart" features, remove connectivity to the internet, heck, remove the ATSC tuner for all I care and let that be managed from the outside - in exchange for a large number of inputs. *That*'s how you'll sell me a TV these days.
Were they checking Blu-Rays for anti-DVDRIPs from smart TVs, anti-cracks from game consoles, ...?
For the coming apocalypse, the smart TVs will be computers running zombies for DDoS or bitcoin/monero mining or overload their network's bandwidths or LAN's spies in the DMZ.
Why waste money paying for a Smart TV anyway? Save yourself 300 bucks by buying a non-smart one, then get a Kodi box for 30 bucks. Sure, Kodi connects to the Internet - but you can control what it is doing and choose what to install.
GTFO. Ban scammy parent plz.
I had to unplug my tv from the internet to prevent it from randomly powering off. Manufacturers will stop supporting them after a few years and you are SOL. It’s just a guess but the dlna feature is so old that the newer versions on other devices must have hit a bug.
The problem I have with Samsung TVs are the forced apps, there’s one I need until that app arrives to AppleTV, then I don’t have any plans of connecting the Samsung to a network.
Hi. im the author of subj: stupidest. ever.
if you think you bought a tv that needs updates, or to protect yourself from it like dropping a lion in the monkey cage of a zoo, THEN YOU DIDNT BUY A FSCK.EXT2 TELEVISION! get in writing that you bought a tv, accessible to viewing standard protocols, and not an incomplete work of electronics art that might fit the description of a television after encumbering itself with so-many updates upon reaching it's end-of-life.
i see toomany xeon cubicle heaters ob the side of the road, and have always wondered if Linux could be installed so they could serve webpages to pay for their upkeep cost.
3d panoramic tv protocols being wiped off firmware.
when an upgrade is actually a downgrade...
Roku TVs use the RokuOS to drive the smart TV platform. Pretty much the same as the Roku OS on their STBs.
Spammers getting more cunning I see, the comment actually related to the thread - usually they just say 'good comment' or similar + spam link.
Imagine the fun to be had when TV manufacturers produce smart TVs that surreptitiously connect to cellular networks.
If there's a compelling reason to connect the TV then do so, otherwise hell no.
If you've got a Roku and a gaming console that are already connected, what do you need the TV connected for? Not for gaming or Netflix or Amazon. Unless there's some service you really want that is available on your "smart" TV that isn't available on your Roku or gaming console why is this even a question?
I think I must have bought one of the last dumb TVs that Samsung made, but the Samsung BluRay player I bought with it was "smart". Just about every time I fired it up it had to update its firmware. None of the apps would work without an internet connection and the updates were mandatory - as Bryant said in Blade Runner "no choice, pal", but the apps were mostly crap anyway. The ones that weren't crap were just duplicating what the Roku could do (e.g. Netflix).
Eventually the firmware updates broke the BluRay player. NONE of the "smart" features work anymore and it struggles to play discs now. It won't do BluRay anymore. DVDs mostly work though.
I can't say for sure that the disc problems are due to firmware updates but I find it hard to believe the hardware suddenly stopped being able to read BluRays. I've got a 25 year old Sony Discman that still plays CDs despite being somewhat abused over the years. The BluRay player lost its shit about 3 years after I bought it and it had led a charmed life compared to the Discman.
My Panasonic TV is "smart" too, but the last time I checked they had removed all but one app from it and that wasn't even anything I was interested in. I can't even use it for Netflix.
I want a dumb monitor, not a "smart" TV. And my experience with the "smart" BluRay players killed buying movies for me. When I stuck in a disc that I only saw once and it wouldn't play - and all the other discs I had wouldn't play on either my Samsung or my "smart" Panasonic BluRay player I just gave up.
Buy a "dumb" TV and a Raspberry Pi. Install Kodi and some emulators. Get rid of cable. And as far as 4K TVs go, a lot of people don't realize that with 50 inch, you have to sit 3 feet or closer to notice the details for 20/20 vision. If it's 1080p 50 inch, you can be 7 feet away. http://carltonbale.com/1080p-d.... Maybe it's the Hz's we're noticing? Watching 1930's Dracula on a 120Hz TV is just weird.
Vizio TVs log your habits, and the others probably do too. I have a Vizio smartass TV but use it purely as a dumb display, primarily because:
I have zero incentive whatsoever to let me TV do anything more than display the output of other, better, more respectful devices. There's literally nothing a TV can do for me that requires a network connection of any sort.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I read about people putting the TV on its own VLAN, or other ways around it. However, I prefer something simpler than that. If the TV has network functionality it gets disabled. If it requires to be connected to the Internet to work, it goes back to the store as defective. It technically is legally defective, because this is not an internet appliance, this is sold as a TV. Because it fails to do its primary function, it is defective, and goes back.
As of now, there are many other choices of TVs that I don't have to deal with yet another potentially insecure, spying device.
No, connecting any expensive/critical appliance (TV, fridge, furnace, AC, etc) to the internet is foolish. Disable or don't connect its Wi-Fi and use a secondary device (Roku, Amazon fire, etc) to access any internet based services. That way if the device is compromised/bricked you just toss it an get a new one. It would be nice if other devices (phone, PC) had a similar capacity, but since they don't I suppose we just have to deal with it. But thankfully the market for secondary devices (DVD, BR, Cable/Satellite box, DMP) has been around in the TV market for decades, lets keep it that way. Besides, most "smart TV" interfaces/software are crap, might as well bypass it.
Reader's Digest version answer: Oh Hells NO.
Long answer:
There is no reason whatsoever to connect a TV/display device to the Internet. Only exception would be if there was a serious flaw in the firmware that actually prevented the TV from working as a TV and the update can not be done from a USB storage device. In that case you connect the cable, update, and disconnect.
A simple HTPC (Home Theater PC) can do Youtube, Hulu, Netflix, etc., and it's OS is far more likely to get regular and timely security and software updates, unlike a TV. You can replace/upgrade the hardware/software easily and without costing a bundle (usually). And you have far more control over what the HTPC does and what software is installed than the embedded system in your TV. Plus you can add features that are unavailable with the TV's firmware.
On a personal note I will never own a TV, or other "commodity" device, that requires an internet connection to function and except for the limited exception noted above my TV, dishwasher, refrigerator, etc. will never be connected to the Internet.
No smart TV where the firmware and the hardware come from the same company will connect to any internet connection I control. I will allow Roku and Amazon TVs to connect, but that's because of the at least slightly adversarial relationship to the other vendor - the firmware vendor has an interest in the hardware vendor not screwing up their reputation, and vice-versa. It's harder to cover up misfeatures like Samsung's telescreen behavior when there's more back-and-forth involved in launching a product.
Also, it's just harder to keep secrets when lots of external communication is unavoidable and teams are larger - there are mathematical limits to the scale and security of any conspiracy.
I could not believe the User Agreement for software updates actually thought I might press "Accept" to this, which I never did, but still get software updates. Just to be sure they keep up their side of that User Agreement, Tape and glue work just fine.
NEVER! We only use our TV for DVD videos. No network connection, and no TV connection. KEEP OUT OF MY LIVING ROOM!
Sometimes, real fast is almost as good as real-time.
I went out of my way to buy a DUMB TV. It was one of two options available in 4k, from a no name manufacturer.
Leaving your smart TV disconnected is good enough, but I don't want to give them my money when they bundle stupid features into devices.
If you don't connect it to the internet, it's not a smart TV anymore. So your choice, did you want a smart TV or not?
Their "smart" TVs' built-in media players suck ass anyway.
In fact its very very dumb..
HELL no. Full stop.
Unless it's using something like Android TV or an embedded Chromecast, which some recent TV offerings do, the answer is a definitive no.
If it's a Samsung TV, then it's an pretty blatant and obvious NO, all caps. Samsung, LG and Vizio were already caught red handed with active spying practices, and some of them are facing or faced lawsuits because of it.
Just unplug it. Without smart TV features, it's just a plain TV, which is the safest option as it always was.
https://www.pcworld.com/articl...
https://www.theguardian.com/te...
http://bgr.com/2014/10/31/smar...
http://abcnews.go.com/Technolo...
https://www.consumerreports.or...
https://www.cnet.com/news/sams...
http://bgr.com/2013/11/20/lg-s...
And no, it's not illogical to prevent some devices from connecting to the Internet. The reality of it is that the less stuff you have connected, the less chance you have of getting spied upon and your data being collected. This also applies to IoT devices and other Internet connected devices. If it does not make sense for a service to be connected to the Internet, it shouldn't be. You already have a proper dedicated device for all the "smart" needs, you don't need the often poorly updated with crappy hardware duplicate that came with the TV.
Basic principle of privacy and security standards, limit the stuff you have connected, always measure the convenience of devices versus the privacy risks they can bring. Something that it just seems that lots of people don't realize these days, which is why we'll soon miss the days we didn't have all details of our lives exposed to hackers, advertisers and big corporations.
A single smartphone and a computer is bad enough as is, adding security cameras, TVs, refrigerators, thermostats, smart bulbs, automated blinds, always listening assistants, and whatever more is out there is not simply wrong, it's just plain stupid. People barely have any knowledge or control of simple routers and their desktop computers, let alone all these smart home crap that most don't even really need. People and the tech industry in general are just marching towards a path of no return, we already have growing evidence on how damaging the move is, but people are usually blind to it because they still didn't face their first identity theft case, or something of the like. By the time most people realize the problem it'll already be too late. Data is out there, either publicly exposed or being sold in huge packages of information to be exploited on the dark web, and there will be nothing you can do about it.
Ever taking a dump and feel like what you really need is to stream a video of it directly to your friends? Now you can with Apple iToilet.
Apple iToilet is the first IoT toilet on the market. After every use, iToilet will instantly upload a complete diagnostic of your feces to Twitter. And if you have iPhone X, you can even create a CUSTOM singing poop emoji.
iToilet: only $11,000.
Most people like watching Netflix with one remote. You also have choices of Roku/Android/etc Smart TVs where you have same interface you would have on an extra stick. If not, or you changed your mind, by all means disable WiFi to cut back on overhead/eliminate unnecessary attack vectors. But in general, your TV will connect to Samsung, Netflix, and so on. They may spy on you but, if you are not on the radar of major intelligence agencies, this spying is not likely to have any practical impact on your life. So use functionality which you find useful and free to disable anything you have no interest in.
the terms and conditions on my TV basically stated as it is voice activated, if I want a private conversation I should leave the room!
yeah like thats going to happen, the TV failed to get internet privileges
* Ads
* Possible hacks
* Possible spying (with camera or microphone)
* Someone else mentioned botnets
Hell no.
First, don't buy a so-called 'smart TV' in the first place. Second, don't connect it to the Internet, ever, if you're forced somehow to buy one. If there is some sort of 'activation' required, call the manufacturer helpline, tell them "I don't have Internet at home!" and they'll surely have some way of 'activating' it without the Internet. Stick to your guns on that, insist you'll return it to the store if you can't use it otherwise.
So all the luddite and/or privacy-obsessed or virus-paranoid Slashdot users post their objections in reply, while .001% of the sensible ones post since they're not all riled up by the article. Making it look like not connecting your TV to the internet is maybe a good idea.
I think not watching Amazon Prime streaming movies on our family's expensive huge TV is a great idea, especially when we can watch them on our much smaller computer screens that are harder to gather us all around instead. NOT.
What I meant to say was, if someone is going to infect me through the internet with damaging malware, I don't want it on a device that lacks a hard drive full of my precious files and work and memories. Let me connect my PCs to the internet where I can really feel the pain if I get a virus or trojan, not my TV that has no storage but some flash ROM with none of my work files or photos in it.
Um, I meant I'm worried about how many Smart TVs don't even have microphones and cameras installed like all of my desktop PCs and laptops do.
No, I really was going to observe in addition to Amazon Prime we can also miss out on Netflix, Hulu, YouTube - and oh, actually we don't WATCH regular TV channels through cable any more and haven't in YEARS, we don't even pay cable companies to provide us with the basic TV package unless we have to and if we get it we never watch it.
In other news, after hearing about Flint, Michigan sending people "malware" (lead & toxins) through the city water supply, I am seriously considering disconnecting my sinks and toilets from the untrustworthy city water supply. Or having some genius Slashdot nerdgeek come over and hand install and configure firewalls and shit in the plumbing. (Not literal shit, just figurative shit. My family will take care of adding literal shit to the toilet water before sending it back to the city, thank you.)
You gain nothing from connecting your smart TV while you've already got your consoles and media boxes in the stack.
Don't even bother with fancy routing and shit. Trade it straight across for the same size set from a few years ago, before they made it nearly mandatory to connect the damn things.
Funny story, when the ps4 first came out, I had to update the firmware on my then 3 year old 54'' SONY TV to support it.
It was done through USB, and the TV to this day has never seen the inside of a network. It never nags at me, and has no problems playing content from the plex server served via connected PC. It works perfectly, and is just as sexy as the new ones without all the smart-shit.
You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
Why not just get the non-smart model and connect an [Xbox/PS/Roku/media player of choice] instead? The price difference between normal and smart is about the same as a basic Roku.
Last time I bought a TV (for my in-laws) I made the conscious decision to avoid a smart TV in part because of privacy, in part because they live in a rural area so only have Satellite Internet.
Maybe I just "don't get it", so excuse my ignorance but what possible benefit could a smart TV have if you're not going to be connecting it to the Internet for the purpose of using the in-built apps/services and are instead only going to have a cable/satellite/media box connected to it?
Founder & COO, Hayai India (hayai.in) / USA (hayaibroadband.com)